Salisbury Cathedral : report upon the position of the high altar

S/U/saurtr CrtTHtOKflL - P/,,tr or Plan Qour,ns Sewccrr/tni MoNmenrs .

WiZ. ParT-T . jbaye CCCXX/X .

Wblteinau

lA Bass. Phatc-Lithv'to the Quern ^36. HolboTU

SALISBURY CATHEDRAL.

REPORT

BY

SIR GEO. GILBERT SCOTT, R.A.

UPON THE

POSITION OF THE HIGH ALTAR

JANUARY, 187o.

7

SALISBURY:

BENNETT BROTHERS, PRINTERS. JOURNAL OFFICE

SIR G. G. SCOTT’S REPORT.

Having read with, much interest Mr. Armfield’s letter, pub-
lished in the “ Salisbury and Winchester Journal” in March
last, in which he has suggested the question whether the
ancient High Altar of Salisbury Cathedral was placed where
the Holy Table stood previously to the Alterations of 1789,
or whether it was placed at, or towards, the Western end of
the space beyond the small transept, I have given much study
to the question, in the course of which I have placed myself
in communication with several persons learned in liturgical
and ritual subjects. The result of my investigations, thus
aided, has been a conviction that the High Altar was always
situated, as shewn in the plans of the last century, in the
middle of the Easternmost bay : that is to say, half a bay in
front of the screen which parted off the Lady Chapel or
Ambulatory.

I will classify the arguments, and evidences, which have
led me to this conclusion under several heads.

Firstly, the presumptive evidence afforded by other Cathe-
drals, and great Churches, in which the position of the High
Altar is still marked by the ancient Reredos or by other
distinct evidences.

1. Winchester Cathedrae. — Here we have the mag-
nificent altar-screen of the 15th century, with the place of
the high altar evidently marked against it, and which proves
that the distance from the easternmost stalls to the back of
the high altar was about 80 feet.

2. Canterbury. — Here w r e have the position of the high
altar ; — not remaining it is true, — but laid down accurately
by Gervase, and in our own day by Professor Willis. The
distance from the eastern stalls to the back of the altar was
about 65 feet.

3. Westminster. — Here we have the altar-screen of the
15th century still standing with the recess in it for the
retabulum over the high altar. The distance measured as
before is about 77 feet.

4. St. Albans — Where we have precisely similar evidence
of the position of the high altar, and a distance of at least 65
feet ; probably much more as the stalls could not have come
so far as the eastern piers of the tower from which this mea-
surement is made and between which was a sanctuary screen.

5. Durham — Where, by like evidence, the position of the
altar against the screen being manifest, the distance is shewn
to be about 75 feet.

6. Worcester. — The place of the altar is here indicated
pretty closely by the sedilia attached to Prince Arthur’s
sepulchral chapel ; it was a little forwarder than at present,
and the space from the eastern stalls to the back of the altar
was about 60 feet.

7. Lincoln. — Here the altar stood about half a bay in
advance of the eastern screen, but as the stalls did not reach
the small transept the space seems to have been about 70 feet.

8. Gloucester. — The position of the altar is given by the
sedilia, and the ancient pavement, and by recent excavations,
and the space was about 69 feet.

9. Rochester. — The place of the altar, found by recent
excavations, and the distance 84 feet.

10. Exeter. — The ancient position of the reredos shewn by
old plans, and by the sedilia, and the space was about 65 feet.*

The above Churches have the place of the high altar defined
with absolute or very approximate certainty. Of others we
have very reliable, though not now ocular, evidence, and all
point to the general fact that the high altar stood at the east
end of the Presbytery, though not necessarily so close as to
prevent the circumambulation of the altar.

The Presbytery was of varied, though considerable, and
in many cases of great length ; though this seems to have

* The average of these dimensions is 71 feet, being almost precisely the
same as at Salisbury, supposing the altar to have occupied its received
position.

5

been influenced by the question, whether shrines must be
made room for, to the eastward of it. The altar probably in
early times stood free, though at a later date altar-screens
came in vogue ; but in such cases the circumambulation of
the altar was still rendered practicable by two doorways in the
screen, as at Winchester, St. Albans, Westminster, Christ-
church Hants, and many other cases.

Now, the arrangement shewn in the undated plan of Salis-
bury Cathedral in the British Museum, and in the similar
plan given by Gough, accords with these parallel instances of
still existing, or readily demonstrable arrangements. These
plans belong, probably, to about the middle or early part of
the last century. That they are subsequent to the restoration
effected by Bishop Seth Ward, is shewn by the indication of
his marble pavements ; that they are earlier than Bishop
Hume’s time, is proved by the Hungerford Iron Chapel,
being shewn in its old place in the Nave, not in its present
monstrous position, to which it was removed about 1778-9 by
Bishop Hume. These plans consequently shew the Church
as it was before the commencement of modern alterations.
They shew the stalls, as extending eastward a short distance
into the crossing of the smaller transept; of which space
Leland says that it “ Standeth as a light and division,
betwixt the Quier and the Presbytery.” Towards the west of
this intermediate space, the plans shew a step from the Choir
proper, probably the “ Gradus Chori and, at its eastern
side, they shew another step rising into the Presbytery, —
probably the “ Gradus Presbyterii with some appearance of
a screen, as at St. Albans, and St. David’s, but this is
doubtful. The altar is shewn with its eastern edge placed in
the centre line of the eastern bay of the Presbytery ; en-
closing, as at Winchester, Gloucester, and formerly at
Lincoln, Exeter, &c., a narrow space between the altar and
the screen of the Lady Chapel, which space is approached
by two doors in the altar screen, as at the Churches of which
some have been already enumerated.

The tomb of Bishop Poore occupies a position north of the
altar, a place frequently chosen for the founder’s tomb;

a 3

6

Bishop Blythe’s tomb is behind the altar against the east of
the Lady Chapel screen. The two western bays of the north
arcade, and the westernmost one on the south, are occupied by
high tombs of bishops ; the other two are shewn as vacant ;
but one would (on my view) he occupied by the sedilia.

These positions of the Choir and Presbytery steps have
been confirmed by our investigations on the spot, while we
find at the Presbytery step, on one side, the winch, and on
both the hooks as for the Lenten veil, which is so often alluded
to in the rubrics.

To the north, and south, of the intermediate space under
the crossing, we have found remains (now restored) of the
original north and south doors of the 13th century, — com-
mon to the Choir, and the Presbytery. All this agrees with
the supposition that the Presbytery, was not a space for
unknown uses behind the high altar, but a space in front of
it, between the Choir and the Altar ; just as Gervase says of
Canterbury : “ Continebat hie mums monachorum chorum,
preshiterium, altare magnum, &c.” “ Be choro ad presbi-

terium tres erant gradus. De pavimento presbiterii usque ad
altare gradus tres.” (The place of the altar at Canterbury,
is clearly defined, the Patriarchal Chair was behind it). The
Presbytery (though the word in common parlance was some-
times loosely used) was in fact the space in front of the high
altar essential to the large number of clergy, &c., requisite to
the dignified performance of high mass in great Churches.
It was the same as the “Sanctuary” (see Du Cange under
“ Sanctuarium Altar is.”)

Secondly. That the place of the high altar as shewn in
these two plans was its received position from our own age
hack to that of Leland, in whose time the altar was still
standing, I will now proceed to prove by what I will call the
Traditional evidence, — a catena of witnesses from the more
modern writers back to Leland himself, who saw the high
altar still in its place.

1. In Sir Richard Colt Hoare's “ Modern Wiltshire” he
says : (repeating the words of a former writer) “ Behind the
“ high altar in the Ante Chapel is that [the tomb] of Bishop

7

“ Blythe, and in the Choir under a canopy on the north side
“ of the high altar, that ascribed by the tradition of the
“ Church to Bishop Poore.”

2. Dodsivorth. — Speaking of the tomb of Bishop Poore,
he says : “ which was first placed under a canopy in a wall
“ on the north side of -the altar.”

Speaking of Bishop Blythe’s monument, he says : “ as it
“ stood at the back of the high altar it was placed north and
“ south, and hence according to Godwin, it bore the name of
“ the thwart-over Bishop.”

Speaking again of Bishop Poore’s tomb, he says it was
“ originally placed under a canopy in a wall on the north side
“ of the original high altar.”

I will mention that Dodsworth had seen the state of things
before Wyatt’s alterations, and in an earlier book written
immediately after the completion of those changes, he uses
similar expressions : spealdng of Bishop Blythe as “ buried
immediately under* the former altar * * * “at the

entrance to the present chancel where the old altar stood.”
Also of the monument of Bishop Poore, as ‘ ‘ removed from
the north wall of the former altar.”

3. Carter, the well-knoivn archaeological artist. — In Gough’s
memorials (1803) Carter says “ I found that the monument
“ of Bishop Blyth ivhich teas set at the back of the altar -
“ screen dividing the Choir from our Lady’s Chapel,” &c.,
again : “ Poore’s monument had been dragged from the
“ side of the Choir near the late high altar, where it had
“ rested for so many centuries and on a spot the most fitting
“ the founder of the Holy Temple.”

Carter, on his view of Bishop Poore’s monument given in
Dr. Milner’s “Dissertation on the modern style of altering
“ ancient Cathedrals as exemplified in the Cathedral of
“ Salisbury,” 1798, describes it as “ on the north side of the
“ high altar of Salisbury Cathedral.” This sketch was made
by him in 1781.

4. Dr. Milner himself speaks of Bishop Blythe as having

* Though Bishop Blythe’s monument was at the back of the altar, his
grave was found by Wyatt to extend under it.

been “ buried under the high altar," and of Bishop Poore as
having “ been buried in the most honourable part of the
“ Cathedral.”

I will here digress for a moment to mention that, though
the accounts of Bishop Poore’s burial are discordant, it is
unnecessary to my argument to prove whether this were
actually his tomb or not. If it were so, he occupied the very
customary position of a founder’s tomb ; if it were not so,
that tomb has been attributed to him because it held that
position ; i.e., north of the high altar.

I do, however, feel an interest in the question for other
reasons ; and will therefore briefly state the case. There
was, as Leland tells us, in his time, a tablet suspended in
the Lady Chapel which stated that Poore’s body was buried
at Durham, and his heart at the Monastery of Tarrant, in
Dorsetshire, which he had founded.

In contradiction to this, Robert of Graystanes, a monk of
Durham, and afterwards Bishop elect of that see, and its
annalist, says that Poore was buried at Tarrant.

Godwin says he commanded that he should be buried at
Tarrant ; and, finding his monument at Salisbury, we might,
between conflicting authorities, have jumped to the conclusion
that his body was buried at Tarrant and his heart at Salisbury.
When, however, the tomb was opened by Wyatt, it was found
to contain a body ; which fact would, in its turn, lead us to
reverse this conjecture; a conclusion anticipated by Richardson
in the notes to his edition of Godwin (1748) who says: “Obiit
“ Tarentee Dorcestriam juxta ; ibi natus et ibi cor fuit sepul-
“ turn, corpus vero Sarisburias.”

Dr. Milner dilates upon this statement as follows : “ though
“ he himself was content to be buried in the Convent of
“ Tarent, of which he was the founder, they [the canons and
“ inhabitants of Salisbury] would not give up the claim,
“ which filial gratitude conferred upon them, to his mortal re-
“ mains ; but leaving his heart to the nuns of Tarent, they
“ conveyed his body to their own city.”

Dodsworth also remarks of this monument : “ We cannot
“ assign it to any other of our early Prelates, because their

9

“ monuments still exist, or at least their places of interment
“ can be ascertained.”

We may, therefore, rest assured that Poore’s body was
deposited in the position shewn by the plans referred to ;
which position was, — if the high altar be there correctly
placed, — the post of honour often accorded to a founder.

To return, however, to my catena of witnesses.

5. ** Antiquitates Sarisburienses 1771 — 1777. — Speaking
of the paintings on the vaulting, the author says : “ Over the
“ Choir are the Prophets, and under the Eastern Cross are
“ Our Saviour and his Apostles, as also the four Evangelists.
“ Over the Communion or Altar are the twelve months of the
year.”

Again : “ Behind the high altar, is the ancient altar of St.
“ Mary.”

Again, spealdng of the enclosing screens of the Choir and
Presbytery, he says, “ as those now are on each side of the
“ altar and at the entrance of the Choir from the west.”

Again, of Bishop Blythe : “ He lies buried behind the high
“ altar.”

6. On the plan in the King's Library in the British
Museum is written, “ from the high altar to the upper end of
“ the Lady Chapel is about 80 feet;” which agrees with the
position as shewn on plans.

7. Price, 1753. — “ The ceiling [of Choir] with persons
“ famous in Scripture and labels coming out of their mouths :
“ and over the altar different works of agriculture suitable to
“ the several seasons of the year.” Price in a general plan
of the Cathedral marks the altar (rather as in a diagram than
with precision) at the east end of the Presbytery. He alludes
to two staircases “ over the high altar, viz., on each side of
“ the altar above the aisles.” These are at the N.E. and
S.E. angles of eastern arm of cross — -just behind the place
where the high altar is shewn in the plans.

Again, he says, while spealdng of the enclosures of the
Choir : “I cannot overlook the manner of enclosing the
“ Choir ; it seems, if one may judge from that part near the
“ altar , that the Choir was first enclosed by a plain wall on

“ the outside, standing upon a deep plinth, while the inside
“ was adorned with niches, marble pillars, and tender orna-
“ ments on top, to finish the niches more delicately, as those
“ now are on each side the altar, and at the entrance to the
“ Choir from the west.” (The marks of these enclosing
screens till recently remained in the discolorations of the
pillars.) This passage has been copied by subsequent writers,
and shews that on either side the altar there were in the last
century arcadings resembling those of the Choir screen (now
placed in the Morning Chapel). One hay of these arcades I
would suggest formed the sedilia* Dodsworth tells us that
the arcades of the Choir screen had been used by the archi-
tect in the fifteenth century, who built the cross arches “ in-
“ tended to resist the bend of the pillars, as a support to
“ these arches. Wyatt had consequently to shore up the
“ piers which had been thus supported till a new foundation
“ was completed.” But this only by the way.

8. The History and Antiquities of the Cathedral Church
of Salisbury and the Abbey Church of Bath (1719 — 23). —
“ Behind the altar, under an arch with a closet over it, lies a
“ Bishop at full length, and over him is this inscription,
“ renewed perhaps from the original, which is now defaced : —
“ Hoc tumulo requiescit corpus Reverendi Patris Johannis
“ Blythe quondam Sarum Episcopi Cujus anime propicietur
“ Deus. Amen. Anno Domini MCCCCLXXXIH.”

9. Godwin 1601. — Of Bishop Blythe he says : — “He lieth
“ buried upon the backe side of the high altar, and hath a
“ fair tombe, not standing after the manner of other tombes,
“ east and west, hut over- thwart the Church north and south,
“ for which cause some call him the overthwart Bishoppe.”

Edmund Audley, 1502, Hy. vii. 18. “ Lieth buried in a
“ goodly chappell built for the purpose on the south (cor-
“ rected elsewhere to north) side of the high altar.” This,
taken conjointly with wdiat he says of Bp. Blythe, fixes the
supposed position of the high altar up to that date.

* No doubt that bay athwart the altar, devoted by Bishop Hume, in
defiance of ecclesiastical propriety, “ to the sittings of the Earls of
Radnor.

11

10. Leland, 1545, who wrote while the ancient high altar
was still standing, says : “ There be in the great and fair
“ Chappelle of Our Lady at the este end of the high altar e, 3
“ pillars of marble on eche side.” Also, “ There is a bishop
“ buried by the side of the waulle of the south isle again the
“ high altare without , as in a cemitary where the vergers ly,
“ and in one of the mayne butteres of the Church there is
“ hard by an inscription .... in Latin sumwhat defacid.”
This inscription still exists on the buttress in a line with the
east wall of the presbytery.

The above quotations carry back the evidences of the
position of the high altar to a period when they cease to be
traditional ; and our last-cited witness, seeing the altar still
standing before his eyes, was unaware of the value of his

evidence. _ .

The next class of evidence I will adduce is that which I

will call the Liturgical and Ritual evidence, being derived
from the Rubrics of the Sarum Missal and from the Consue-
tudinary preserved at Salisbury. For this evidence, which
has swollen into a treatise, I am indebted to my eldest son,
who has devoted much time to the study of ritual history,
but who has been helped by sundry papers and suggestions,
kindly sent to me by Mr. Mackenzie Walcott and Mr. Beres-
ford Hope.

ON THE ARRANGEMENTS OF THE SANCTUARY
OF SALISBURY CATHEDRAL AS INDICATED
BY THE RITUAL OF SARUM.

The question, what were the ancient arrangements of the
Cathedral Church of Salisbury, is quite distinct from the
question what may be the arrangements most suited to
modern ideas and modern requirements.

We must not allow our notions of what would be most
convenient now to affect our judgment as to what were the
actual arrangements then. The two issues are quite distinct,
and should be kept so. The one is a matter of opinion, the

A 4

12

other a question of fact. Whether, that which suited the
13th century may not also be very fit for the 19th : whether
ve have so fai improved in matters of ecclesiology upon our
ancestors . as to be able to better their dispositions ; or
whether, if we have, it is wise, or even worth our while, to
introduce our new notions into the ancient and venerable
building erected for the performance of the ceremonial of St.
Osmund ; these and such like questions have nothing to do
with the discussion now before us ; our object here is simply
to inquire what were, as mere matter of fact, the original
arrangements of Salisbury Cathedral, more particularly of its
Eastern limb. Having settled these purely antiquarian
points, the further questions raised may be left, as the
subject of a separate discussion.

. As St - Osmund’s rite was no mere arbitrary invention, but
simply a new link added to the chain of ecclesiological tra-
dition, we shall find that the dispositions contemplated by it,
and many of the terms employed, can only be understood by
a reference to earlier usages. This is particularly the case as
regards the meaning of the word “presbiterium,” upon which
very mainly turns the question of the position of the Hfoh
Altar at Salisbury.

Christian Churches have, from the first ages, been com-
posed of three distinct compartments. Two of these are
constantly and necessarily present, even in the smallest
oratory. The third is never wanting to any large Church. A
Nave and Sanctuary are to be found, practically distinguished
m the simplest chapel. A Nave, Quire, and Sanctuary, form
the necessary elements of every complete Church.

In the Basilic* the principal structural division occurs
between the Quire and the Sanctuary : in the fully developed
medieval plan it is placed between the Quire and the Nave.
The former is the normal disposition, the latter in reality
exceptional, and peculiar to one period, though that a very
impoitant one, in the history of Church architecture.

Having constantly before us our ancient Churches, erected
mostly during the four centuries which constitute the Middle
Ages, and new buildings constructed in imitation of them.

13

we are apt to suppose that a Church consists typically of a
Nave and Quire, or Chancel. This is a very mistaken notion.

A Church consists essentially of a Nave and a Sanctuary, a
Quire being quite ad libitum. In a Basilica, this principle is
enforced by the disposition of the structure itself. The
triumphal arch divides the Sanctuary from the body of the
Church, and the Quire, when present, is an enclosure, stand-
ing in the centre of the Nave. The Eastern Church, ever
most conservative of primitive usage, has never departed
from this arrangement. Her Churches are still Basilican in
their disposition. The structural division now, as anciently,
divides off the Sanctuary from the Nave, and the Quire is
without the iconostasis, in the body of the Church.

Although this primitive and essential division between the
Sanctuary and the whole of the rest of the Church became, in
the course of the middle ages, subordinate to that introduced
between the Quire and the Nave, yet it was never lost sight
of, and it was far more prominent to the minds of medieval
ritualists, as appears by their writings, than by the study of
the buildings alone we might have been led to suppose.
Thus Durandus treats of a Church (including the atrium) as
consisting of four parts. He speaks of the “ cancellus seu
peribolus” which surrounded the Quire whence the rood-
screen, and side enclosures of western chancels, and also of
the “ cancelli” which separated the Quire from the altar, the
equivalent of the eastern iconostasis, and of the sanctuary
screens of St. David’s, and probably St. Albans. Quoting
from Bicardus de Sancto Victore, he says, “ Dispositio
“ ecclesise triplicem statum salvandorum significat, and he
points to the structural nature of this triple division when he
adds, “ Strictius est enim sanctuarium quam chorus, et chorus
“ quam corpus.”*

The ecclesiological history of the middle ages may almost
be summed up in this one point, the development of. the
Quire. In the earlier medieval Churches, the eastern limb,
as far as the transept, continues to form, as m the Basilicae,
the Sanctuary, the Quire continues to be a mere enclosure

* Eat. Div. Off. 1. 1—3.
a 5

14

withm the Nave. This arrangement, so common in all the
earlier Monastic Churches, St. Albans, Kirkstall, Gloucester,
Rievaulx, Westminster, Tintern, Winchester, &c., was no
exceptional peculiarity, as we are apt to regard it. It is in
reality the old and typical plan, the tradition of the Basilica,
and of the earliest Christian Churches.

It is Lincoln, \ ork, Lichfield, and Salisbury which repre-
sent the abnormal arrangement, the great innovation of the
middle ages.

In introducing this striking change by -which the principal
structural division of the building was moved from the eastern
end of the Quire to its western limit, the medieval ecclesio-
logists did not, of course, discard altogether the venerable
traditions of the preceding centuries of Church history.
Indeed at Salisbury and elsewhere the lesser transept, an
invention of this period, was so placed as to serve, as the
gieat transept had served in the Basilicae, to mark off the
Sanctuary from the rest of the Church. The eastern transept
at Lincoln and at Salisbury, takes the place very obviously of
the great transept in the ancient St. Peter’s, and in St. John
Later an.

In the Ritual the distinction between Quire and Sanctuary
is most marked. It is indeed of the very essence of the
Sarum, as of all other Christian, rites. In the celebration,
for example, of the High Mass, two quite distinct bodies of
clerics took part, the choir who occupied the stalls, and the
celebrant with the “ministers of the altar,” who occupied the
Sanctuary. Each of these two bodies had its distinctive
vestures. To the choir belonged the surplice and cope; to
the altar ministers, the albe, the dalmatic, and the chasuble.
The two groups of ecclesiastics entered the church at distinct
times— the choir, of course, before the commencement of
Tierce, the celebrant and his ministers after Tierce, durino- the
Gloria Patri of the Introit.* Those of the choir who had to
take a part in the Altar service never advanced further east-
ward than the “ gradus chori” at the east end of the stalls
while the Altar ministers never passed to the west of this

# Sarum Consuetudinary, cap. 93.

15

step, save that the deacon and sub-deacon on Sundays passed
through the Quire in order to sing the Gospel and Epistle in
the Rood loft.

The “ gradus chori” was in fact the limit of the two
domains. Up to this step the rulers of the choir advanced
to sing the Gradual; as far as this step the deacon came
down to convey the kiss of peace to the rulers, and through
them to the whole choir.

The division, therefore, between Quire and Sanctuary is
ritually the important one, although in the structure of
churches of the ordinary medieval type, it has become
subordinate to that between the Quire and the Nave. When
therefore we have to consider any question of the arrange-
ments of a great Church, such as that of Salisbury, we shall
expect to find that, however strongly marked may he the
more modern line drawn between the Quire and the Nave, the
ancient distinction by which the Sanctuary was separated
from the whole body of the Church is still existent in the
structure and decoration of the fabric, as it is in the directions
of the ritual.

Accordingly we find at Salisbury, as we should have
expected, a structural line, immediately to the east of the
Quire, the lesser transept ; of subordinate importance no
doubt to that which the great transept forms at the west of
the Quire, but still a striking feature of the fabric. As in a
Basilica the transept formed part of the body of the building,
and the ritual division of the Church was defined by the
triumphal arch upon its eastern side ; so the lesser transept
at Salisbury belongs partly to the Quire and partly to the
Sanctuary, and the scheme of decoration which extends along
the Quire ceiling culminates in the crossing bay. To the
east of this bay commences a new system of ornamentation,
that of the Sanctuary proper. As the decoration of the Nave
led up to and culminated in the great rood upon the eastern
side of the great transept, so the decoration of the Quire
reached its completion in the “ Majesty” before the eastern
arch of the lesser transept. The triple arrangement of the
Church is thus indicated with the same distinctness in the

16

system of its iconography, that it is in the planning of its
structure.

It may also he noticed that, as in the Basilica the actual
Sanctuary extended somewhat to the west of the triumphal
arch, which formed its structural limit, and encroached upon
the body of the Church, so we find that something more
than half the space under the crossing of the lesser transept
seems to have been comprised in a certain sense in the
Sanctuary. The Sanctuary is spoken of sometimes as if it
extended to the “ gradus chori” at the east end of the stalls,
and sometimes as if it terminated at the eastern arch of the
crossing.

This comparison of the medieval arrangements with the
Basilican is especially important because of the light which it
throws upon the meaning of the word “ presbiterium” upon
which the question under discussion mainly turns. The
word itself is Basilican and primitive, Greek not Latin, and
it therefore belongs, not to the innovations characteristic of
medieval ecclesiology, but by its very etymology, to those
earlier traditions which underlie them. The Basilican Pres-
bytery was in fact the Sanctuary, or more strictly that portion
of the Sanctuary occupied by the presbyters assisting at the
Eucharist, as distinguished from the altar itself, at which
the Bishop stood to celebrate.

Now we find in the Salisbury ritual books, and in others of
the same period, the word “ presbiterium” applied precisely
to the corresponding portion of the medieval Churches. The
only difference in the application of the word is this : in most
of the Basilic* the altar stood in that part of the Sanctuary
which was nearest to the body of the Church, and both the
place of the celebrant, and also the presbiterium, lay behind
it. In the medieval Churches as a rule, the altar stood
near the eastern end of the Sanctuary, and the celebrant,
and, analogously, the “presbiterium” was to the West
of it.

Accordingly we find in the Sarum Missal* the Presbytery
described as “ inter chorum et altare,” and similarly the

* Ordo sponsalium.'

17

Lenten veil is directed to be suspended ‘ ‘ in presbiterio inter
chorum et altare.”* In illustration of this we have the direc-
tion in the Cistercian Ordinary that the veil is to hang ‘ ante
presbiterium. ”t With these passages we may compare a
passage in Ordericus Yitalis (vii. p. 66), given by Du Cange,

“ Ipsamque in presbiterio inter chorum et altare sepelierant.
Gervase, in his description of Canterbury Cathedral in the
twelfth century, has a passage which defines very precisely
the situation of the Presbytery in that church. He speaks of
a marble wall, “ qui chorum cingens et presbiterium, corpus
“ ecclesias a suis lateribus, quse ake vocantur dividebat. \

This wall he states again enclosed the Quire of the monks,
the Presbytery, the high altar, and two side altars [those of
St. Dunstan and St. Elpliege] as well as the throne of the
Primate, and he adds, “ De choro ad presbiterium tres erant
“ gradus, de pavimento presbiterii usque ad altare gradus
“ tres, ad sedem vero patriarchatus gradus octo.”

The Presbytery then is that part of the Church which by
Durandus, as also in modern language, is termed the Sanc-
tuary. Thus at Salisbury at the High Mass the celebrant
and his ministers, while the introit is being sung, passing
from the vestry through the doorway still existing in the
southern wall of the crossing of the lesser transept, presbi-
“ terium intrent et ad altare accedant.”§

In the Salisbury ritual books the word “ presbiterium is
used sometimes in a wide sense, sometimes in a sense more
restricted. In the former it is applied to the whole area,
which extends from the Choir-stalls eastward to the arches
opening into the Lady Chapel. In its narrower use, it is
applied to that portion of the larger area which intervened
between the “ gradus presbiterii” at the eastern side of
the lesser transept, and the ascent of steps leading to the
altar.

Of the first and wider acceptation we have examples in the
following passages of the Consuetudinary : “ Eat processio

* “ Sarum Consuetudinary,” cap. 102.
t Dr. Roch, “ Church of our Fathers,” Vol. 4, Appendix, p. 81.

+ “ Church of our Fathers,” 4, p. 210. § Sarum Cunsuet., cap. 93.

18

per ostium presbiterii septentrionale et eat circa presbi-
“ terium.”*

Eat processio per ostium presbiterii — presbiterium cir-
“ cuendo per ostium chori occidentale cborum intret.”t
F rom these expressions it is clear that the Presbytery, in
the wider sense, extended to the east end of the eastern limb
of the Church, and that the doors which exist in the lesser
transept were considered as the doors of the Presbytery.

Another instance shewing that the space formed by the
crossing of the small transept was, in a sense, included in
the Presbytery is afforded by the directions as to the aspersion
before the High Mass. I First the priest asperses the altar
on all sides, then returning westward “in redeundo” he
sprinkles “ ministros sic ordinatos incipiendo ab acolito.”
Then “ ad gradum chori rediens” he asperses the clerics, who
from the Quire come up to him, as he stands at the choir
step. After this aspersion of the clerics he turns and
sprinkles “ laicos in presbiterio bine inde stantes.” This
done he returns to the “ gradus chori” and there recites the
collect.

From this it appears that just as the clerics came up from
their stalls to be aspersed at the “ gradus chori,” so the lay
folk came in for the same purpose from the side aisles
through the Presbytery doors, and stood on either side of the
area upon which these doors open, which is thus defined as
forming a portion of the Presbytery.

The admission of the laity into this part of the Pi’esbytery
for the aspersion gives us a hint as to the origin of the
arrangement so common in Spain, where the western portion
of the Presbytery is reduced to a mere passage-way con-
necting the Quire and the Sanctuary. The Spanish laity
once admitted here, made good their vantage ground, and
rails being at length introduced to preserve the necessary
passage between the “laicos in presbiterio liinc inde stantes”
the side walls of the Presbytery no longer needed were
removed. It is also common in French Churches to place

* Sarum Consuetudinary, cap, 69. f lb. cap. 77.

J lb. cap. 68.

19

laymen of distinction in this portion of the Presbytery during
the High Mass.

As instances of the narrower and more precise sense which
the word Presbytery very frequently bears, we have those
passages already quoted, in which it is defined as lying
between the Quire and the altar. Of these the passage
quoted from Gervase is particularly definite, and in another
passage of his treatise the doors, which at Canterbury
correspond with the Salisbury “ostia presbyterii,” are spoken
of as doors of the Quire.

In a similar manner the Lenten veil is spoken of in the
Cistercian Ordinary, a very typical medieval rite, as being
before the Presbytery “ cortina ante presbiterium tendatur”*
where the word is used in its narrowest sense, while the
Sarum Consuetudinary using the word in its more general
application says “velum dependeat in presbiterio.”t

The word is to be understood then either in a general sense
of the whole space which extended from the stalls to the
commencement of the Lady Chapel, or more precisely of that
portion of this area, which lay between the eastern transept
and the steps which ascended to the altar.

In its wider sense, therefore, it consisted of four portions.
1st. The space between the “ gradus chori” and the “ gradus
presbiterii.” 2nd. The area thence to the altar steps. 3rd.
The space occupied by the altar and its steps, and 4th. The
space reaching thence to the end of the eastern limb.

This latter area is traditionally known at Winchester and
elsewhere as the Sancta Sanctorum. At Canterbury it contained
the Patriarchal Throne with its own ascent of steps, but at
Salisbury it appears to have been very small. There is no
allusion to it in the ritual except in the directions for censing
and aspersing the altar from which it appears that there was
sufficient space to pass behind the altar. Thus we have the
expressions “ thurificando altare circueat, and “ principale
“ altare circumquaque aspergat.” j The fact of no fuller
mention of this space occurring in the rubrics seems to show

* Church of our Fathers, 4, App. 81. f Sarum Consuet., cap. 102.

J Sarum Consuet., cap. 25 and 68.

20

that it was of no great ritual importance and that it contained
no shrine. The only reliquaries mentioned were placed upon
a beam or super-altar above the high altar and not in this
small area behind it. Six candles were placed upon this
ledge “ in eminentia coram reliquiis et crucifixio” (probably
the altar-cross) “ et imaginibus ibi constitutis.”* That this
space was not large is further proved by the position of the
tomb of Bp. Blythe whose body lay in the usual position and,
as it is described, under the altar, but his tomb was placed
“ overthwart” as otherwise it would have interfered with the
ceremonies of the censing and of the aspersion. Thiscircum-
ambulation of the altar is doubtless a Basilican tradition,
and it was not lost sight of even when in the later middle
ages lofty stone reredoses were introduced. We always find
such screens pierced by two doors, one at each end of the
altar, as at Christchurch, St. Albans, Winchester, West-
minster, Arundel, and elsewhere.

In illustration of its position, standing thus free and
detached, we find the high altar defined, upon the first occa-
sion on which it is referred to in the directions for the cele-
bration of the high mass, as the altar which is in the midst
of the presbytery, “ altare in medio presbiterii,” to distin-
guish it from the numerous altars standing in other parts of
the Church. In all subsequent mention of it, it is called
“ principale altare,” or simply “ altare. ”t

I think that a clue to the exact position of the altar might
probably be obtained by examining what provisions exist in
the groining for the suspension, first, of the pix in which the
B. Sacrament was reserved, “ corona una argentea cum
cathenis iii. argent., cum columba ad eucharistiam.”t
“ Cuppa una argentea bene deaurata cum corona argentea de
“ dono Willmi Brewere in qua reponitur eucharistia,” “ vas
“ continens eucharistiam ;”§ and secondly of the lamp which
burned before it.

There were in all seven steps from the Quire area up to the
high altar.

* lb. cap. 5. + lb. cap. 67.

I Church of our "Fathers, 4. Appendix 101, Salisbury Inventory.

§ lb., Appendix 107 Sarum Cousuet., cap. 102.

21

The first is the “ gradus chori” so constantly referred to
in the ritual hooks. It lay immediately to the east of the
stalls and west of the Presbytery doors, as is apparent from
the directions as to the aspersion of the clergy and laity
already quoted, and also from the sequel.* The procession
left the Presbytery by its northern door and passed round
behind the High Altar down the South Aisle of the Quire
and Nave to the Font “ eat processio per ostium presbiterii
“ septentrionale, et eat circa presbiterium, &c.” On its
return up the centre of the Nave it made a station at the
Rood-loft, the boy bearing the Holy water, and the acolite
standing the while at the step at the entrance of the Quire
“ puer deferens aquarn et acolitus stent ad gradum ante
“ crucem.” Then after the usual prayers had been recited
“ precibus consuetis dictis,” the procession entered the Quire
“ chorum intrent,” the clerics regained their respective stalls,
and the celebrant advancing with the Altar ministers up to
the “gradus chori” said at that step the versicle and the
collect and then passed on, evidently through the South door
of the Presbytery, to asperse the cemetery of the canons
which lay to the south of the Presbytery east of the Chapter-
house and cloister. Thence he returns with the ministers to
the vestry to vest for the Mass, and as soon as Tierce is over
and the office or introit commenced they enter the Pres-
bytery (passing again through its southern door) and advance
to the altar, “ ordinate presbiterium intrent, et ad altare
accedant.”f

The position of the “ gradus chori” is well marked in the
directions as to the Pax. t The deacon having received the
kiss of peace from the celebrant, and having given it to the
subdeacon, proceeds to the “ gradus chori,” where he lasses
the two rulers of the choir, who from thence convey the Pax,
the one to the Dean the other to the Precentor, and so to the
whole of the clerics present in the Quire, “ qui duo (rectores)
“ pacem clioro reportent, incipientes a decano et cantore.”
The Treasurer is directed§ to provide a wax candle to burn
during the singing of matins at the Choir step at the east end

* lb. cap. 69. f lb. cap. 93. £ Ibid. § lb. cap. 5.

22

of the stalls “ unum cereum ad matutinas scilicet ad gradum
“ chori,” and a mortar light “ mortarium” at the choir gates
at the west end of the stalls, “ ante januas ostii chori occi-
“ dentalis dum matutinarum expletur officium.”

The “ gradus chori” therefore lay between the eastern end
of the choir-stalls and the Presbytery doors.

Proceeding eastward the next step is the “ gradus pres-
biterii.” This was the step which formed the western limit
of the Presbytery in its narrower and stricter acceptation.
It lay to the east of the Presbytery doors, as the “ gradus
chori” to the west of them, and ranged no doubt with the
eastern piers of the crossing hay of the small transept. Its
position east of these doors is well marked in the directions
as to vespers.* During the singing of the last verse but one
of the hymn, the priest leaves the choir (no doubt by the
south Presbytery door) in order to put on his cope in the
vestry “ad cappam sericam assumendam.” Then, while the
versicle and response are in singing, the two candle hearers
enter (by the south Presbytery door), advance to the “gradum
coram altari,” ) take up the candles there standing, and return
westward to meet the priest advancing eastward from the
south Presbytery door, the meeting point being defined as the
“ gradus presbiterii.” “ Interim autem introeant ceropherarii
“ et acceptis candelabris veniant obviam sacerdoti ad gradum
“ presbiterii.” Thence the priest, having blessed the incense,
advances with them to the altar for the censing during the
Magnificat.

The Lenten veil crossed the Sanctuary at this point, and
this line must be considered as the most important ritual
division of the Church (because here the Sanctuary in the
strictest sense of the word commenced), more important by
much than that second line, marked by the rood screen,
which gradually, by an innovation characteristic of the Middle
Ages, had become the more striking feature in the structure
of the building.

The space between the “ gradus chori” and the “gradus
presbiterii” was a sort of debatable ground, pertaining in part

* lb. cap. 25.

f lb. cap. 5.

23

to both Quire and Sanctuary, “ a light and division betwixt
“ ^ uire and Presbytery,” as Leland well styles it. Its
ambiguous position is well exhibited by the admission to it,
as we have seen, of the laity during the aspersion, an intrusion
which has become a permanent feature of the usual Spanish
arrangement. But at the “gradus presbiterii” begins the
Sanctuary proper.

At Salisbury this is finely brought out by the commence-
ment at this line of an entirely new iconographic scheme,
m the decoration of the vaulting. The scheme which is
appropriated to the Quire reaches its climax at this point,
and that which belongs peculiarly to the Sanctuary here com-
mences.

The position here of the Lenten veil is well shown in the
directions of the Consuetudinary* On the ferial days of Lent
the Epistle and Gospel were not sung as usual on Sundays, in
the rood-loft, but the Epistle was read at the “gradus chori,”
and the Gospel at a lectern placed for that purpose in the
Presbytery. “ Cantatur — evangelium non in pulpito in
“ a( l mIa > sed in presbiterio super pulpito apparato.” Now
at this season the Lenten veil was hanging between the
Choir and the altar, and it is directed that during the
singing of the Gospel and the offertory the veil shall be
drawn up.f It appears from this that the veil was westward
of the deacon, when singing the Gospel in the Presbytery, but
to the east of the subdeacon when reading the Epistle at
the “ gradus chori.”

The directions as to the veil would require to their execu-
tion some little mechanical contrivance, i First, the veil is
to hang all across the Presbytery, “dependeat in presbiterio.”
Then at the Gospel it was — not drawn aside, as in the
«. Cistercian rite, but— raised up, as is the curtain of a theatre,

“ extollitur et elevatum dependet.” Then at the “orate
fratres’ after the offertory it was let down again, “ demittitur.”
Lastly on the Wednesday in Holy Week, when in the Passion
the words occur, “ velum templi scissum est,” it fell entirely
and was then removed, “ predictum velum in area presbiterii

# lb. cap, 95. f lb. cap. 102.

+ Ibid.

2 4

decidat.”* The hooks and the winch which still exist fixed
in the eastern piers of the crossing hay appear to answer very
well to the mechanical requirements of these rubrics.

The next step is that variously described as “ gradus
“ altaris,” “ gradus coram altari,” and “ extremus gradus
“ ante altare.” Between this and the “ gradus presbiterii”
there was evidently a considerable interval. We have seen
that the ministers of the altar were here aspersed standing in
order evidently from east to west, and as there were several
of them this ceremony required some considerable space
“ In redeundo,” i.e., from the high altar westward, im-
“ primis aspergat ministros sic ordinatos incipiendo ab
“ acolito.”t

It will be observed that this— the customary order of the
aspersion was followed also when the Bishop pontificated,
and when, therefore, the number of the ministers taking part
in the ceremony was very considerable. How large this space
was may be judged from the number of clerics who took part
in the ceremony of the consecration of the oils on Maundy
Thursday. On this day the Bishop of course pontificated,
and he was served by seven deacons and seven sub-deacons. I
There were also required to the performance of the Pontifical
Mass,§ the Precentor “ qui omnes cantus ab episcopo incipi-
“ endos ipsi episcopo in propria persona tenetur injungere, ||
the principal acolite and two others, two cerofers, two thu-
rifers, and the cross bearer. To the ceremony of the Holy
Oils, IT which like our own ordination service is interweaved
into the Mass, there were required in addition to the above,
the Archdeacons of Berkshire, and Dorset, and one of the
Archdeacons of Wiltshire, three additional deacons bearing
the oils, one deacon bearing a silk tabernacle over the oil
of the chrism, three acolites with banners, and three boys
in surplices to sing the “ 0, Redemptor.” In all there must
have been from thirty to forty persons engaged in this
ceremony, which consisted of a series of three small

* According to the use contemplated by Durandus the veil remained
suspended until Good Friday.

f Sarum Consuetudinary, cap. 68. £ lb. cap. 93. § lb. cap. 3.

|| lb., cap. 93 et passim. lb., cap. 104 and Pontifical.

25

processions. The position of the Bishop the while is
described, in the Pontifical, as withdrawn a little from the
altar, and as no mention is made throughout the rite of any
step intervening, we must conclude that the whole took place
between the “ gradus presbiterii,” and the “extremus gradus
ante altare, ’ and therefore that a very considerable area inter-
vened between these steps.

. tlie “ g ra dus altaris” commenced the ascent to the
high altar. This flight included first and uppermost the
toot-pace or step of the celebrant “ Sacerdos stat ad altare,”*
then that of the deacon, “ diaconus post eum stet in primo
gradu ante altare,” called also “ gradus diaconorum,” then
the “ gradus subdiaconorum,” then that on which stood the
principal acolite “ acolito in gradu post subdiaconum con-
stitute.”! Lastly there was the “gradus altaris”! on
which the cerofers rested their candles and to which the two
boys who had sung the Gradual advanced to make their
obeisance “ dicto vero gradale pueri cantores ad gradum
altaris mclinaturi redeant. Ӥ

These steps were small platforms rather than mere steps
for at the veneration of the cross on Good Friday the missal
directs that the cross shall be laid upon the third step of the
altar, apparently that of the acolite, and that the two priests
of the upper grade who had carried it thither shall be seated
uring the veneration upon this platform, on either side of
tfie cross lying between them.

It would appear, too, that all of these steps, with the
exception no doubt of the footpace, extended from side to
side of the Sanctuary, for the seven deacons and seven sub-
deacons required for the Pontifical Mass on Maundy Thursday
and on Whitsunday, stood in a line north and south# across
the Sanctuary, all the deacons upon the deacon’s-platform
and all the sub-deacons upon that of the sub-deacon.

, * lb., cap. 93.

“DM-n f l„ 0 We i,!q" dei ' Stancl . to , meau that the acolite stood upon the
g adus subdiaconorum behind the subdeacon, the ascent would be of
foui steps instead of five, but the space, east and west, required for the

.uroosTt. Co" “ tbe -top moot tt,„ b.

+ lb. cap. 5. Ib. cap. 93. || ibid

26

The whole rite from its extreme elaboration and evident
stateliness required to its proper performance a very ample
Sanctuary. In our own new Churches, wherever any attention
is paid to ceremonial, we find the Sanctuaries are much too
small even for a very simple ritual, and the few ministers can
scarcely carry out the most modest ceremonial without danger
of unseemly jostling. It is impossible to suppose that the
elaborate rites of a Pontifical celebration, or of the Palm
Sunday ceremony, of the blessing of the oils on Maundy
Thursday, or of the veneration of the cross on Good Friday,
according to the Sarum use, were carried out in the Church
erected especially for their performance, on any than the
grandest scale and with the most ample space for their
stately celebration. Without the provision of such an area a
complicated ceremony becomes an unintelligible crowding.

Such an area appears to be provided in the three bays which
lie east of the smaller transept, and I have no doubt that a
careful examination of the indications given by the structure
and decorations of the fabric itself will confirm the conclusion
as to the very ample dimensions of the Salisbury Sanctuary,
to which a study of the rubrical directions inevitably leads.

To sum up, the rubrics point to seven steps or platforms
east of the Choir, the “ gradus chori” near the eastern
extremity of the stalls and west of the Presbytery doors, the
“gradus presbiterii” east of these doors and agreeing, appa-
rently, in position with the eastern piers of the crossing bay ;
close to this step was the line of the Lenten veil ; thence a
considerable area, convenient for the performance of an
elaborate ceremonial, requiring the presence of a numerous
body of ministers, extended to the altar steps. Of these
there appear to have been four, each of some little width, and
above them and highest of all was the footpace itself upon
which the altar was erected. Beyond the altar only a small
space, scarcely alluded to in the rubrics, intervened between
it and the termination of the whole Presbytery.

There is no allusion in the Consuetudinary or in the Missal
to a morning altar, placed as usual in monastic churches, in
advance of the principal altar ; on the contrary, we have this

27

direction, “ Bi aliquod festum novem lectionum Quadragesime
“ fiat in aliqua feria, ante tertiam missa de festo dicatur
“ post nonam vero missa de jejunio utraque ad principale
“ altare,”* which seems to exclude the idea of a matutinal
altar. It would appear, then, that the morning altar men-
tioned by Britton, was introduced subsequently to the com-
pilation of the Consuetudinary,! and there is reason to believe
that it did not stand in the Presbytery at all.

I have only to add that from the internal evidence I have
no doubt that the Consuetudinary — or “ De Officiis Eccle-
siasticis Tractatus” was compiled after the transference of the
See from Old Sarum, and the erection of the new Cathedral.
This appears to me to be evident both from its exact agree-
ment, in every particular which I have observed, with the
existing Church, and also from the allusions which occur in
the treatise to the City of Salisbury and its Suburbs.

G. GILBERT SCOTT, Jun.

Besuming my argument — thus (including the preceding
paper by my son) proving the case (as I think it does) from
1. Presumptive evidence; 2. from Traditional evidence; and
3. from Liturgical and Ritual evidence ; I will only add a
few words in reply to objections.

The most important of these is founded on the paintings
of the vaulting, where the more sacred subjects terminate in
the crossing of the smaller transept (that “ division betwixt

* lb. cap. 100.

t The morning altars at St. Albans, Westminster, Worcester, &c.,
which stood in front of the Presbytery, were probably peculiar to
Monastic Churches ; which renders it probable that that mentioned as a
subsequent addition at Salisbury, but not alluded to in the Rubrics, &c.,
was in some other part of the Cathedral. — G. G. S., Senr.

Since writing the above note, I have observed in Dr. Milner’s disser-
tation the following passage, taken from some early MS. notes to his
copy of Godwin (1615) which he thought nearly coeval with the text :
‘ In the body of the church, under the third arch from the tomb of Bishop
Roger, was the altar called de missa matutinali, where the early service
was privately performed, immediately after the holding of chapter every
morning.’ I think this was in the first of the eastern chapels of the
north-east transept, being that nearest to the north entrance of the
Presbytery.

28

the Quier and the Presbytery,”) while more trivial subjects
occupy the ceiling of the Presbytery itself.

I will premise by saying that I do not feel that those
who are convinced by force of evidence that the high altar
was at the east of the Presbytery are bound to be able to
explain the scheme of the mediaeval decorator ; the onus
probandi rather lies with those who dispute the traditional
and received arrangement. I will, however, give a suggestive
explanation offered by a friend who from the first revival of
ecclesiological study has occupied an eminent position in the
foreground of that movement.*

“ The argument on the other side is, you tell me, derived
“ from the comparative character of the roof-pictures over the
“ crossing and west of the east transept compared with those
“ east of it.

“ The dignity of the personages shewn culminates in the
“ most eastern portion of the vaulting of the east crossing in
“ a Majesty.

“ I wonder they don’t see how this argument cuts more
“ than one way. That bay is the culmination of one of the
“ three divisions of the Church, viz., the Choir as distinct

from either the lower Nave or higher Presbytery (or Sanc-
“ tuary). The roof-decorations of the Choir having been
“ struck in a high key, the effigies of not only the greatest of
“ men but of men who preach and sing and make scripture
“ (an eternal choir in fact) legitimately culminate in the
“ greatest of all who have ever worn flesh, — the second Adam
“ whom they in prophecy and psalm and gospel are wor-
“ shipping. Assume that the altar was put under or west of
“ this Majesty and then the symmetry of their system of roof
“ decoration breaks down, it has begun in the Choir and it
“ has thus come into the Sanctuary.

“ Rather you must take it in connection with the separa-
“ tion (probably a veil) of which you say the indications
“ exist, as the stop in the Church made by the eastern piers
“ of the crossing, this, whether veil or something more sub-

* I am permitted to mention that this is Mr. A. J. B. Beresford
Hope. m.p.

29

“ stantial, represents that Sanctuary screen of which instances
“ or of something similar to it can he traced in various larger
“ Churches corresponding with choir or rood-screens between
“ Choir and Nave, and of which the eastern iconostasis, and
“ English ‘ altar-rails’ are the direct counterpart.

“ This exists as you know in a concrete form at St.
“ David’s.

“ As, then, the rood accomplished and was taken in in the
“ same coup d’oeil with the Choir partition — so the Majesty
“ might well he so disposed as to be taken in in a similar
“ coup d’oeil with the Sanctuary partition.

“ Does not the Majesty appear in the Basilicte somewhere
“ over the arch which represents ritually the Sanctuary arch
“ (the Choir proper being obtruded into the Nave as a
“ ‘ chorus cantorum’) as well as in the Conch of the Sanc-
“ tuary itself?* If so_, the former position is a clear prece-
“ dent for you.

4i ******

“ Now then, how are we to account for the apparently
“ much less sacred character of the roof-imagery in the
“ Presbytery? May not this involve a more recondite sym-
“ holism ?

“ The roof of the Choir where clerks said the offices appro-
“ priately gives us the effigies of Prophets and Apostles
“ singing and saying the praises of Christ, the choir of the
“ Church universal joining the living one below.

“ The Sanctuary is ecclesiologically the seat of God himself,
“ carnally so according to the materializing doctrine of Tran-
“ substantiation.

“ Therefore out of a higher reverence the figures of actual
“ once-living human beings might be absent.

“ Thus in the Eastern Church the decoration is heaped on
“ the iconostasis — within it is plain.

“ But why the months? May these not figure the per-
“ petual recurrence of the Eucharist — and the perpetuity of
“ the veneration ?

* This is occasionally the case, or at least the head and shoulders of a
Majesty, as formerly at St. Paul’s without the walls.

80

They would embody the promise, ‘Ecce ego vobiscum
“ sum omnibus diebus usque ad consummationem sasculi.’

“ I throw out this but for what it may be worth.”

This argument has been adopted by my son, not indepen-
dently, but from seeing the above and from a conviction of
its soundness.

Another friend learned in ritual antiquities had also told
me that the “ zodiac,” or employment of the seasons, had in
the hands of the medieval decorators a symbolical signification,
which I should think likely, as otherwise one would be at a
loss to account for its extensive use, especially during the 18th
century, though it is found long before and continued long
afterwards.

It is curious that, while the labours of the seasons are
usual in Churches, their amusements are more frequent in
domestic architecture; as if the continued round of duty
were more usually symbolized in one and of enjoyment in the
other.

A fair corollary from the former argument has been sug-
gested : that, while the Saviour was represented at the
termination of the Nave by the rood, and at the termination
of the Choir by the “ Majesty" in the ceiling, the believer in
transubstantiation would not feel such representation needful
over the altar, where he held that He was actually Himself
present, but this may be an over-refinement.

The other leading objection against the received position of
the altar is founded on the statement by some writer that
in the alterations made by Bishop Hume about 1778-9
the Choir “ was lengthened 20 feet towards the Lady
Chapel.”

Now, if this be interpreted of removing the altar 20 feet
nearer the Lady Chapel than it was before, I must meet it at
once by a distinct contradiction ; for we have in the two
plans so often referred to its precise position just before
Bishop Hume’s time, i.e., the middle of the last bay of the
Presbytery. That these plans are anterior in date to Bishop
Hume is shewn by their placing (as before stated) the Iron

31

Chapel of the Hungerfords in its old position in the Nave —
not in the place where Bishop Hume placed it in 1778
and where it still remains — and if the Bishop moved the
altar 20 feet eastward he must have pushed it on into the
Lady Chapel, and pulled down Bishop Blythe’s monu-
ment.

We know he did not do this, nor have we a suggestion that
in the 10 years which intervened between Hume’s work and
that of Wyatt the altar occupied any different position from
that shewn in the plans referred to. On the contrary, all
evidence goes to disprove this.

That loose statement, therefore, of the extension of the
Choir eastward must have meant something different from
this, nor is the explanation difficult. Bishop Hume had
done away with the Nave sermons, and the Nave seats pro-
vided for them. He had consequently extended the Choir
seats, and in doing so enacted that those towards the east
should on occasion be appropriated to the Corporation and
the Judges. The extension, then, of the Choir by twenty
feet must have meant the Choir proper, i.e., the part fur-
nished with seats, not the Presbytery beyond it.

I have now done with the past ; but the question still
remains whether if the end of the Presbytery loere the ancient
position of the altar, it is incumbent on us to retain that
position.

I confess I should he glad, now that we are returning from
the aberrations of Wyatt, that our return should be to the
true old place, and not that we should overstep it in one
direction as he did in the other, like the Knight who

“ Vaulted into th’ seat
“ With so much vigour, strength, and heat,

“ That he had almost tumbled over
“ With his own weight (but did recover)."

I feel that we ought to restore and respect the ancient land-
marks, and not strike out new ideas of our own (inconsistent
as I deem them to be) with the ancient arrangements.

It is true that we have not the great staff of Cathedral
clergy and the splendid ritual of the middle ages ; but the

32

pre-eminence of a Cathedral as the great central Church of
the diocese, remains the same ; and we still have great occa-
sions : as Ordinations, &c. (and we ought to and shall have
more), when the clergy of the diocese are assembled together
in presence of their Bishop, and when the whole space
between the stalls and the altar will offer but scant room for
the multitude of the assembled clergy, and when that great
space will be in a diocesan as in every other sense par
eminence “ The Presbytery.”

GEO, GILBERT SCOTT.

January, 1876.

POSTSCRIPT.

The unavoidably diffuse character of the argument in the
above paper has suggested to me the necessity of summing it
up in a more concentrated form.

The simple question, then, for consideration is whether the
High Altar of Salisbury Cathedral was, — as has been supposed
by every writer on the subject and as shewn in all existing
plans (till removed by Wyatt), — towards the east end of the
eastern arm of the main building ; or whether it was under
(or nearly under) the crossing of the eastern transept, a
position shewn in no plan nor even hinted at by any writer ;
and for suggesting which the only argument is derived from
the painted decorations of the ceiling ; which paintings,
though only recently brought before the eyes of the present
generation, were — till the year 1790 — as patent to all observers
as they have now become to ourselves.

I have shewn, first, that the traditional and, till now un-
controverted, position is the normal position of the high
altar of a great English Church. I have proved this by
reference to ten of our Cathedral and Abbey Churches, in
which the position of the altar remains indisputably marked ;
and in which the average distance from the Choir Stalls to
the altar is about the same as at Salisbury. It follows from
this that, if the high altar at Salisbury were where hitherto
it has been supposed to have been, it was in its usual and
customary place ; while, if it were where now for the first
time suggested, Salisbury would be the exception to other
great English Churches, and its high altar in a position
altogether abnormal.

I have, further, shewn that all circumstances of the
building, as existing or known to have existed, agree with the
traditional position ; as, for example, the Founder’s tomb to
the north of the altar ; Blythe’s tomb at its back ; the

34

Presbytery step as discovered ; the winch and hooks, as for
the Lenten veil, over the Presbytery step, fixed in the 14th
century pier.*

I might also have mentioned the two choir or presbytery
doors, which our investigations have shewn to be of the 13th
century, just west of the same step ; and have further shown
that had the altar been placed beneath the Majesty it would
have held an impracticable position between these two doors.
I might also have added that in the vaulting of the Presbytery
are numerous holes through which ropes have been passed
(leaving their marks to the. present day) which would probably
be found compatible with known facts and requirements.

I have next shewn that a catena of writers reaching back
from our day to that of Leland (who saw the altar in its place)
unanimously place it in the eastern bay of the Presbytery ;
and that Leland absolutely defines its position by his notice
of an inscription on one of the external buttresses, which he
speaks of as “ again the high altar,” which inscription
remains to the present day.t

I have next, by the assistance of a paper by my son, shewn
that a space equal to that of the Presbytery was absolutely
necessary to the due performance of the Ritual prescribed by
the Sarum service books and Consuetudinary ; and that a
great part of these ceremonies were performed east of the
Presbytery step.

Leland then comes to our aid, and clinches the evidence
given, as with one voice, by so many witnesses ; for, speaking
of the eastern transept, he says: — “ The second transeptum
that standeth as a lighte and division betwixt the Quier and
the Presbytery .” Now, we know the quier, and we know that

* It has been objected that the winch and hooks are not fixed in the
thirteenth century piers. That they were so once I have no doubt, but these
piers having given way, the winch &c., would naturully be re-fixed after
the repairs. I do not suppose these appliances, any more than the veil
itself, to have lasted all these centuries without renewal. Even the service
books as they have come down to our time are for the most part copies of
different periods.

t It is said that this passage in Leland is unintelligible. For myself, I
will say that I understood it sufficiently well to direct the Clerk of the
Wovks by letter where to look for the inscription — And there he found it!

35

east of it comes the second transept ; and it follows that
the space beyond that was the Presbytery referred to by
Leland.

If, then, as the service books prove, the main ceremonial
of the altar services took place in the Presbytery , and the
altar itself stood beyond the place where those ceremonies
were performed, how is it possible that the altar could have
been beneath or near to the Majesty, which is in the very
crossing of that transept which is stated by an eye-witness to
have been a “division betivixt the Quire and the Presbytery ?"

CADIT QILESTIO.

Yet, still, it will be asked — why did the ceiling-paintings
culminate in this “division” and fall off again in the Pres-
bytery ? I reply that we are not bound to account for the
fancies of the decorator. They may have been strange, yet it
would have been far stranger to have placed the altar in a
position different from that of any other high altar in a great
English Church of which the position is capable of proof ;
and yet stranger still would it have been, in building de novo
the Mother Church of England’s most popular ritual, to have
placed its high altar in a position incompatible with the due
carrying out of that famous ritual ; while leaving behind it, as
a useless room, a space which, by placing the altar in its
customary position, would have well provided for every ritual
requirement !*

We are not, however, left with this decorative puzzle as a
mere unexplained anomaly. Mr. Beresford Hope has shewn
that the culmination of the iconography over the gradus
Presbyterii is a most consistent arrangement. Of the intro-
duction of the Seasons into the Presbytery some explanations
have been suggested. It was one of the most favourite sub-

* home of those who object to the received position — feeling the force
of the argument that if placed under the Majesty, the Altar would have
stood between the tioo Presbytery doors , — suggest that it would satisfy
the eye it placed one bay more to the east ; forgetting that it would there
be beneath the two subjects especially singled out for merriment.

36

jects of the'period, and I have myself found it m an altar
pavement ol a like date. It was an idea in its own nature
fanciful, and we have therefore no right to object to the
suggested interpretations that they also are fanciful.

It suggested no ludicrous ideas to our unsophisticated,
forefathers ; and, finding it represented over where we learn
by accumulated evidence, that the most sacred rites were
celebrated, it is for us to accept it as a fact rather than to
disturb facts which we know, for the sake of explaining others
of whose significance we are ignorant.

GEO. GILBERT SCOTT.

Bennett Brothers, Printers, Journal Office. Salisbury.